Do You Own a Gun?

[Beestie]

Originally Posted by zippyt

if your neighbor doesn't buy into the same societal convention, he will kill you and take your stuff and your women. So good luck with that.

Thus the need for a gun to defend your self and your stuff .

Its interesting to me that some people are so hung up on spelling, grammar, and dialectic jargon that a stunning example of crystal clear thinking like this sails right over their heads while the rest of us just put the mouse down and slide the keyboard back knowing there is nothing else to add.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by zippyt

Thus the need for a gun to defend your self and your stuff .

Are you inferring that you've used your gun to protect yourself or your stuff?

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by Beestie

Its interesting to me that some people are so hung up on spelling, grammar, and dialectic jargon that a stunning example of crystal clear thinking like this sails right over their heads while the rest of us just put the mouse down and slide the keyboard back knowing there is nothing else to add.

Ok, so you agree with him. I'll alert the media.

[busterb]

10-4 on da zip and beestie

[busterb]

Some folks will argue with a damn stump.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by Radar

If he tries he will meet the same fate he planned for me but in my case, I'll be using defensive force and exercising my rights, while he'll be using offensive force while trying to violate them. My position is clear, concise, and has no flaws or ambiguity. This is because, unlike yours, it's based entirely on reality and truth.

Don't you understand that if your neighbor would do this, he doesn't share the rights that supposedly were floating around waiting for you to be born? Rights are a societal convention. That's reality and truth, not mysticism and mumbo-jumbo, like your theory.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by jinx

Right on, Buster.

Does anyone else completely tune people out once they start throwing around "you conservatives" or "you liberals" as an argument?

Why not tune out (or condemn) the people who offer no substance to a debate, just pop in to insult a debater?

[xoxoxoBruce]

Society doesn't give rights, it restricts them.

If you were the only person in North America you have the right to do anything you want... anything. You could shit in the punch bowl if you wanted.

BUT, if one (or more) people move in, you now have a society which limits your rights to do anything you want because you have other people to consider. And they you, which limits their right to do anything they want.

Society restricts rights.

[zippyt]

yes Spex , I have had to use a weapon to defend my self ( against a Neibors dog ) , myself and my wife have fire arms , we know how to use them affectivly , and will use them if nessary. One of the reasons we moved here is that this area is sooo much nicer than where than where we both came from ( Memphis TN ) .
You nay have heard of White flight , we flew , not just from the city , or the area , we left the whole damn state !!!

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by Radar

Rights are as real, tangible, physical, and undeniable as gravity. You can go in the deepest recesses of space and gravity still exists, though its strength is diminished. Your rights exist even within the most fascist and brutal nations, they are being violated and you are prevented from exercising them, but they still exist. You can not physically take away gravity, and you can not physically take away rights.

It would be impossible in this universe but you can take away gravity. Gravity is a physical acceleration, it has physical properties, and you can take it away. You will never be able to reach absolute zero in this universe but it is possible hypothetically. You can not hypothetically have someone born without natural rights. If you are born into a fascist nation, your rights are taken away from you when you are born; you were never born without them.

That is an opinion. I'm talking about facts.

This is pointless. There is no way to prove or disprove this.

Rights exist as a matter of fact, not opinion.

Back that up. I am interested in seeing how it is a fact.

Rights existing is an opinion because they are not physical. There is no way to scientifically find natural rights just as there is no way to scientifically find a soul.

There was a first human and there will be a last human too. The age at which someone becomes an adult is fluid. I know plenty of 60 year olds who are not adults, and 15 year olds who are.

I am seriously not trying to call you out on this but that is not how evolution works. There are two kinds of evolution: microevolution, a change in of an allele in a population, and macroevolution, the separation of two species. One generation will never experience macroevolution or microevolution but only a single mutation. There was never a first human just as there is never a time when someone becomes an adult. It is a long slow gradual process where you can never tell when a species does evolve.

No, human rights didn't appear when the first human was born. They have existed for all time and the first human was imbued with them at birth.

Do you believe in intelligent design. Evolution is random so the chances of life actually evolving into humans are one in a near infinite number. We just got that one time where we did evolve into humans

The beauty of natural rights is they don't have to be enumerated or codified. We have the right to do ANYTHING as long as our actions do not prevent another person from exercising their rights, and do not physically harm or endanger that person or their property.

I really don't believe the world is that simple. Here is a real life situation with my roommate and my hallway. He wants to go to bed at 9:00 at night. The rest of the hallway wants to have fun and be loud all night. There is a conflict of interests. It is my roommate's right to get sleep but it is my hallway's right to have fun and be loud. To be able to live peacefully together, these two groups will have to compromise. My roommate will have to put up with the noise until 11:00 and then my hallway will have to be quiet. Both groups have to give up their rights to function within a community. If my roommate didn't live in a community, he would be able to sleep whenever he wants without distractions. If my hallway didn't live in a community, they would be able to be as loud as they want for as long as they want.

I don't argue this. I've always maintained that one persons rights end where another's begin.

So you agree that people have to compromise when they live in a community?

But you seem to not only have a hard time comprehending the meaning of rights, but you also have a hard time distinguishing them from privileges or desires. My right to sing a song you don't like supersedes your desire not to hear it. The most minor of my rights is more important than your most fervent desire.

So where is this list of rights, privileges, and desires?

If you love someone, does it exist? Can someone take from you the love you have for your mother? Is the love you have for your mother merely an illusion?

Love is caused by chemicals in the brain. If you take away the chemicals you take away the love.

There is no illusion of rights. There are rights and there are privileges and they are complete opposites. When you live in a "society" you don't have to give up your rights or even compromise them anymore than just respecting the equal rights of others. Most of the time there are those in a society who want to impose their desire onto others and prevent them from exercising their rights through force, but they still have the rights.

I think we agree but just are using different words.

If I live in a society that has a social norm that says you can not drink and drive.

I can physically drink and drive even when I live in this society. We both agree on this.

I am saying that once we have broken that norm, we have distanced ourselves from that society which will bring consequences on us that will usually inflict on our rights (going to jail, being fined, ostracized by the rest of the society).

[Phil]

Uk had 54 gun related deaths last year. gun control does work, its just that America is paranois as fuck, just because you have an old piece of paper that says you have the right to bear arms doesnt mean you should.

[Kitsune]

Originally Posted by Phil

Uk had 54 gun related deaths last year. gun control does work, its just that America is paranois as fuck, just because you have an old piece of paper that says you have the right to bear arms doesnt mean you should.

The UK is not the US. Different cultures, different ideas. People in the US don't trust police to do everything for them, including protect them. UK culture emphasizes government protection for almost everything, including a ban pointy objects.

Suggesting the laws of one country would have the same effects (both positive and negative) on the other isn't really valid.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Society doesn't give rights, it restricts them.

If you were the only person in North America you have the right to do anything you want... anything. You could shit in the punch bowl if you wanted.
...

Sounds more like no responsibility and a free schedule, not rights.

Rights are agreed-upon behaviors.

[Clodfobble]

Spexx, think about it this way.

If you found a small, isolated culture in the jungle where it was the societal norm to sacrifice two dozen children each year in a very long, painful ritual, would you consider that wrong? Do those children have a "right" to life that supersedes their society's agreed-upon behaviors?

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

Spexx, think about it this way.

If you found a small, isolated culture in the jungle where it was the societal norm to sacrifice two dozen children each year in a very long, painful ritual, would you consider that wrong? Do those children have a "right" to life that supersedes their society's agreed-upon behaviors?

You're asking me how I feel about those rights. Sure, I feel that it's wrong. But if rights tangible, objective "things" that we have when we are born, wouldn't the people in the tribe feel the same way that I do? The fact that they don't feel this way supports the concept that rights are not objective or universal, they are societal conventions. Sorry, I disagree with you.